[Patches] [ python-Patches-1494140 ] Documentation for new Struct object

[SourceForge.net]

Patches item #1494140, was opened at 2006-05-24 09:26
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by gbrandl
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1494140&group_id=5470

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: Documentation
Group: Python 2.5
>Status: Closed
>Resolution: Accepted
Priority: 6
Private: No
Submitted By: Bob Ippolito (etrepum)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: Documentation for new Struct object

Initial Comment:
The performance enhancements to the struct module (patch #1493701) 
are implemented by having a Struct object, which is a compiled structure. 
This text file documents these new struct objects.



----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Georg Brandl (gbrandl)
Date: 2007-02-15 11:30

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=849994
Originator: NO

I completed the patch and committed it as rev. 53785, 53786 (2.5).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Neal Norwitz (nnorwitz)
Date: 2007-01-04 06:55

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=33168
Originator: NO

Even if this only documents part of the API, it seems like it would be
better to get that in and finish it off later.  Anyone know what's going on
with this?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Georg Brandl (gbrandl)
Date: 2006-10-29 09:28

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=849994

What's the status of this? It should have been in 2.5 final...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Georg Brandl (gbrandl)
Date: 2006-08-02 07:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=849994

New/renamed functions need a \versionadded/changed. For
StructObjects, I'd suggest a sentence like "Struct objects
are new in version 2.5" at the top of the section.

There's no explanation how to create a Struct object. The
constructor must be explained, preferably on the module
overview page. Isn't the type name "Struct"?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: George Yoshida (quiver)
Date: 2006-07-30 17:33

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=671362

> Does this patch still need to be updated for pack_to()
I suppose so and hence updated my patch.

(1) document pack_into(pack_to is renamed to pack_into).
(2) document pack_into/pack_from as module functions
too(just like re module)

As for the function name change, I've already updated
"what's new in 2.5" in r50985.

I guess the patch is ready to be applied. Reviews are
appreciated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: A.M. Kuchling (akuchling)
Date: 2006-07-29 19:28

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=11375

Does this patch still need to be updated for pack_to(), or can it just be

applied?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: George Yoshida (quiver)
Date: 2006-07-10 17:26

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=671362

Patch for the TeX style doc.

Bob, can you work on updating the main section right after
2.5 b2?


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Bob Ippolito (etrepum)
Date: 2006-05-26 13:05

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=139309

We're going to need to revise this patch some more to document the new 
pack_to function (for Martin Blais' hotbuf work)

Additionally we'll probably also want to revise the main struct
documentation to 
talk about bounds checking and avoiding the creation of long objects.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Bob Ippolito (etrepum)
Date: 2006-05-25 14:32

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=139309

That's clearly a typo. I've attached a new version of the patch that
removes those 
two letters.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Jim Jewett (jimjjewett)
Date: 2006-05-24 21:03

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=764593

Shouldn't self.size be the number of bytes required to *pack
* the structure?  The number required to *unpack* seems 
like it ought to include tuple overhead and such...


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Bob Ippolito (etrepum)
Date: 2006-05-24 15:35

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=139309

New patch attached, fixed unpack documentation, added unpack_from method.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Bob Ippolito (etrepum)
Date: 2006-05-24 14:54

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=139309

Hold up on this patch, I need to revise it.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=305470&aid=1494140&group_id=5470